I predict that the Tories will get a couple of hundred thousand more votes than Labour (whilst getting fewer seats), and the media will start screaming en masse and pretending that this goes Cameron the divine moral right to enact the entire Conservative manifesto. I also predict that inevitable calls for voting reform will be sidetracked by straw men arguments and a Sun campaign for boundary reform.

With the potential Labour meltdown in Scotland, the opposite could now happen.

With the potential Labour meltdown in Scotland, the opposite could now happen.

 

Yup, Scotland was one of the main reasons for the supposed bias in the electoral system towards Labour: they always swept the board there on a pretty modest share of the vote (in 1997 it was actually one of their worst "regions" for vote share), because of the 4-way split.

 

The irony is that if Scotland had gone independent, there'd be more chance of a Labour majority now. Which tbh is karma for so many Labour people allying themselves with a right-wing campaign for purely selfish interests.

Edited April 5, 201510 yr by Danny

Yup, Scotland was one of the main reasons for the supposed bias in the electoral system towards Labour: they always swept the board there on a pretty modest share of the vote (in 1997 it was actually one of their worst "regions" for vote share), because of the 4-way split.

 

The irony is that if Scotland had gone independent, there'd be more chance of a Labour majority now. Which tbh is karma for so many Labour people allying themselves with a right-wing campaign for purely selfish interests.

Do you really think that the seats were the only reason Labour cared about the union? I'm really hoping fiscal autonomy doesn't go through - nothing could be worse for the Scottish people right now given how much oil prices have plummeted.

I think the only option that makes sense for the politics we have at the moment is the Additional Member System (with about 450 constituencies elected by first past the post and 200 top-up list regional MPs).

 

That said I won't complain if we somehow conspire to get in two-member STV.

I think the only option that makes sense for the politics we have at the moment is the Additional Member System (with about 450 constituencies elected by first past the post and 200 top-up list regional MPs).

 

That said I won't complain if we somehow conspire to get in two-member STV.

Do you mean STV in two-member seats? I'm not sure that would work very well. Surely, most seats would need four or five members to achieve rough proportionality.

Do you really think that the seats were the only reason Labour cared about the union? I'm really hoping fiscal autonomy doesn't go through - nothing could be worse for the Scottish people right now given how much oil prices have plummeted.

 

 

Precisely, Labour (mainly Gordon Brown actually) have actually helped to save Scotland from committing economic suicide given the oil price practically halving in 6 months, and likely to have exaggerated the collapse in Scotland's oil industry that is now occuring.

 

Although the cynic in me does think that it is quite likely that the loss of Labour seats in Scotland did form part of the reason for standing side-by-side with the Tories in the 'better together' campaign.

Edited April 5, 201510 yr by Doctor Blind

The reason Labour went with the Tories for Better Together was because it was the only way we could get the cheque books opened to fund the campaign! Otherwise funding would've been reliant on the unions and probably come directly out of the budget for the general election campaign.

Do you mean STV in two-member seats? I'm not sure that would work very well. Surely, most seats would need four or five members to achieve rough proportionality.

There's a reason I used the word conspire! In fairness I think two-member would be a bit too obvious a stitch up. Three-member could work as a trade-off between stability and proportionality I suppose.

Actually the worst thing for our economy is people in England dictating to Scotland what we should be doing with our finances and how we should be running our country.

 

Yes the oil price has fallen but devo max would allow us to help to diversify our economy, encourage more investment and become less oil dependent. The basic fact of it is, Scotland is more left/scandinavian-leaning than rUK and we want to pursue different policies. We should be allowed to do that, and the current devolution settlement does not allow that or incentivise us to do things because the payoff doesn't flow back through our pockets.

Actually the worst thing for our economy is people in England dictating to Scotland what we should be doing with our finances and how we should be running our country.

Is it? Is it really? http://www.moopy.org.uk/forums/images/smilies/grin.gif

 

You'd have an utterly gargantuan black hole for the foreseeable future because of oil prices - diversify your economy all you like, but fiscal autonomy now would be like redoing the 80s all over again until waiting for the Big Bang. Your Big Bang might be a slightly more sustainable one than the UK's turned out to be, but there'd be a ridiculous amount of pain until then. Now isn't the time at all. And the pay-off does flow through your pockets - moreso than it does for most in the UK, and it's called the Barnett Formula.

Do you really think that the seats were the only reason Labour cared about the union?

 

A lot of Labour people openly admitted it!

 

I can't see why else they would've joined a campaign whose tactics and arguments were straight out of the classic right-wing playbook: "Big businesses and the markets don't want it, therefore because they're so powerful we must unquestioningly obey them", "there's just so many uncertainties, it's so much easier just to not rock the boat and stick with what we've got now".

Aside from the straw man phrasing, I'm sure Labour will only be arguing to stay in the EU for those reasons because of the seats too!

Aside from the straw man phrasing, I'm sure Labour will only be arguing to stay in the EU for those reasons because of the seats too!

 

Do most Labour people (not in the London chatterati set) even really give a shit whether we stay in the EU or not?

Edited April 5, 201510 yr by Danny

They don't now, but they probably would give a shit about the consequences if we actually left.

They don't now, but they probably would give a shit about the consequences if we actually left.

 

What consequences? I really doubt most Labour people are going to be swayed by some rich businessmen feigning concern about the "national interest", when they really mean their own pockets.

 

I think if this EU referendum happens turnout will be below 50% tbh. I'm just really not sure the public cares about it as much as politicians think they do.

What consequences?

The end of the United Kingdom they just campaigned so hard to save.

What consequences? I really doubt most Labour people are going to be swayed by some rich businessmen feigning concern about the "national interest", when they really mean their own pockets.

 

I think if this EU referendum happens turnout will be below 50% tbh. I'm just really not sure the public cares about it as much as politicians think they do.

 

Surely free movement, the right to healthcare across the continent, the ability to withdraw a state UK pension whilst living anywhere in the EU, the ability to study anywhere in the EU without a specific visa and a collective body which is working towards improving environmental standards and living standards (as well as the obvious economic benefits) is more than enough reason and losing all of this would probably sway a lot of labour voters into thinking the EU is a good thing.

Edited April 5, 201510 yr by nickthenoodle

What consequences? I really doubt most Labour people are going to be swayed by some rich businessmen feigning concern about the "national interest", when they really mean their own pockets.

Why the fuck do you think the Tories want to leave?! Sovereignty isn't just some fetished principle they're after in and of itself - the Social Chapter would be torn to shreds if we left, not to mention that the barest semblance of rights for immigrants would be gone.

 

You seem to be under the illusion that just because 'what's best for business is best for everyone' isn't true, that means that what's worst for business is best for everyone. A lot of people would be put out of work by companies relocating to Europe.

I mean bloody hell Danny - do you really live under the idea that literally everything in politics is pointless apart from public spending?!